________________
1152
SAHRDAYĀLOKA It may be noted that the dhvanivādins have practically treated all figures of both, sound (=śabda) and sense (i.e. artha) as 'citra' or 'avara' kāvya in general. It is only Jagannātha who picks up some alamkāras under what he terms ‘uttama' and some others under 'madhyama'. For Jagannātha, who offers a four-fold scheme of classification, 'artha-citra', is not placed on a par with 'sabda-citra', which for him is lesser poetry. For him where the beauty (camatkāra) of the expressed is not on equal footing-"a-samānādhikarana"- with the suggested or 'vyangya', is the third type of poetry. This means that when we have the beauty of the expressed placed higher than that of the suggested it makes for the third type of poetry, i.e. 'madhyama' kavya. But when we have the beauty of the sound-'śabdaas principal and that of sense is subordinated to it we have a fourth type of poetry, which is termed 'adhama' by Jagannātha. It may be noted that here Jagannātha expects that the beauty caused by word is necessarily enhanced by the subordinated beauty caused by sense. He suggests that in this variety also there is at least some presence of the suggested sense, but it certainly does not cause beauty in any way and is therefore not at all intended-avivaksita'-and so subordinate-'a-pradhāna'also. For him, in ‘adhama' variety of poetry, the artha-camatkşti or beauty caused by sense is necessarily absorbed in sabda-camatkrti, i.e. beauty caused by word. But in a case, where there is total absence of any beauty caused by sense i.e. where only 'śabd-camatkřti' prevails, i.e. such illustrations of poems as "ekákşara-padya', "ardhā"vrtti-yamaka”, etc.- this type has to be taken as no poetry at all. This can not be taken as a fifth variety called "adhamá-dhama" i.e. 'worse than the worst, because it can never fulfill the basic condition of poetry viz. "ramaniyárthapratipādakatva', i.e. "that which brings up beautiful meaning.” When there is no "kāvyatva" at all in such a composition as "ekákşara-padya", it is useless to call it a fifth variety, for it will be equivalent to follow a blind tradition. Jagannātha ends the topic by supporting his four-fold scheme by observing that the difference between sabda-citra' and 'artha-citra' being self-evident, it is useless and illogical to brand them equally as "adhama”. Even in the absence of any equality if both are taken as identical, then we should put aside our opinion taking 'dhvani' and 'gunībhūta-vyangya' as separate.
With this ends the classification of poetry, that we term as "criticim-based.”
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
